Page 25 of 29

Re: The meaning of meaning

PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 7:18 pm
by ArturoDekko

"All is Pattern" is the single most meaningful statement one can make about existence. The recognition of the place of a thing within the pattern is that which we interpret as meaning. Without pattern, there is no relationship, no association, no recognition, no meaning and no existence. Without pattern, there can be nothing we could call God. Anything we can call God is pattern; they are inseparable. Pattern is all there is; it is only our insistence in finding a meaning for everything that ascribes the meaning "God" to the pattern. Pattern just is. Pattern has no intent, no motive.

Imagine infinite randomness. Within that randomness, there will always be pattern. Where there is pattern within the randomness, we recognise existence. Where there is no pattern, there is no recognition, no existence. Within the infinite randomness, there is infinite variety of pattern; all variations of pattern exist, without discrimination. There is no good pattern; there is no bad pattern; there is just pattern. Pattern has no meaning in itself, it is only we, within the pattern, that ascribe meaning to the placement of things within the pattern. Our existence is a meaningless by-product of the pattern but our observation of our place within the pattern gives the illusion of meaning. If we are removed or remove our self from a part of the pattern, our recognition of the meaning of that part of the pattern is lost. Where we do not recognise the pattern, we see no meaning.

Immersion in and acceptance of the pattern brings about a sense of oneness, unity and love. When the pattern that we are is within a contradictory pattern, we experience discord and negativity. From this position, if we step back and see more of the pattern, we realise that it is all part of a larger pattern and that nothing is out of place, that on the larger scale, there is no discord, only pattern which is always in harmony with itself. The only freedom we have is to accept the pattern or not. When we do not accept the pattern we are in disharmony and have no ability to make choices within the pattern for we do not own it. When we accept the pattern and become a part of it we gain control of the pattern for it is ours.

All forms of want and desire are a lack of acceptance of the pattern, whether positive or negative. Attachment, being the desire to keep something, carries with it the fear of loss. Dislike carries with it the desire to lose that which we dislike. Both are forms of lack of acceptance. We can perceive either that we are attracted, instantaneously and unavoidably to external conditions which mirror the pattern that we hold within us or that we create the reality around us that we project from within. It matters not for we are our reality and our reality is us. Thus any form of want is mirrored and sustained in the reality we perceive. Only in acceptance can we experience a reality that is in harmony. If we find ourselves out of harmony, we have to accept it for the value it brings us and only then can we create within us an image of harmony which we will then find mirrored around us.

There are only five categories of pattern and all that we see is a combination of these five.
1. A = A Things that are the same. Without there being bits that are the same, there can be no pattern and no recognition.
2. A ≠ B Sequences such as the counting numbers. 1 + 2 gives stripes.
3. A = B & B = C Triangular and by extension hexagonal and circular patterns. 1 + 2 + 3 gives concentric circles = nesting and growth patterns.
4. A ≠ A + B Square and rectangular patterns, extending to tetrahedral, cubic and octahedral arrays. 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 gives geometric sequences and spirals.
5. A + B = C Fractal patterns, dodecahedra, icosahedra and four dimensional decahedra. 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 gives all variations of organic patterns.

There is a constant bipolarity of pattern. Within pattern there is non-pattern and within non-pattern there is pattern. Take the rather mundane counting number sequence. Firstly realise that it is also a sequential list of all possible random numbers. Any sequence of random numbers will always be found somewhere within the counting number sequence even, ultimately, all the irrational numbers. Speaking of irrational numbers; they are infinitely long and infinitely varied and hence each contains every potential sequence of numbers somewhere within the string of numbers they generate; that is they contain all possible patterns of numbers and as stated before, infinite randomness of existence contains all possible patterns. Strangely though irrational numbers are not all equally random. There are degrees of randomness. Some random numbers contain within them sequences of numbers that are repeated more frequently than some others. There is a spectrum of randomness and we do know which the most random number is. This is just a little pause because the answer, to me, is so magical that it deserves a little fanfare. The most random number is ... da da da daaah ... the solution to the equation x(1 + x) = 1 which is the definition of the Golden Mean, the Divine Ratio, a ratio found everywhere in nature. It can be shown that this number in engineering mechanical terms produces the most efficient structures in patterns of cell division.

Let me show you something else rather surprising. Let us measure all sorts of natural phenomena, the width of rivers, the height of mountains, the length of twigs, the distance between stars and galaxies, the weight of pebbles or whatever you care to measure. This will give you a list of numbers. If you look at this list of numbers, you will find that more of them begin with 1 than they do with 9. In fact there is a decreasing spectrum of frequency of occurrence from 1 to 9, so natural measurements are not entirely random. You can convert the measurements to any scale you like, angstroms, inches, metres, astronomical units, light years, and the result is always the same. You can even change the base of the number sequence say from decimal to hexadecimal and 1 still rules as king. Is that not a strange thing?

Back to the counting number sequence. Could anything be more logical and obvious than a pattern that increases by one with each step and yet we do not have to look far before irrationality starts creeping in. We only have to ask which numbers are only divisible by 1 and themselves. These are called prime numbers and the sequence starts, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, ... and I hope you can see that it has already broken out of the realms of pattern. It turns out that for any given segment of the number sequence, we can find a mathematical formula that will produce the prime numbers but outside that segment the formula will not work. You can take a larger segment and find a formula that describes the sub-formula, but there is not any all encompassing formula that can describe all the primes within the sequence of counting numbers. This means there are local patterns within larger patterns but there is no overall pattern.

We can find other non-pattern patterns within the prime number sequence. Notice the pairs, 3:5, 11:13, 17:19 where two numbers are separated by one. The question of how often they occur produces the same sort of results we found with prime numbers. Again we could look at the sets of whole numbers that form Pythagorean triangles from the familiar 3,4,5 then 5,12,13 and onwards and find a similar result. The whole number sequence and indeed the Universe is composed of a nested pattern of non-patterns within patterns within ... within an ultimately random universe whose overall ratio is the Golden Mean which is encapsulated within the geometry of pattern itself in the two dimensional projection of the four dimensional decahedron, known as the pentacle.

A good example of the infinite possibility of variation in pattern is found in the snow flake. Based only on an angular similarity of 60 degrees that stems from the geometry of the individual water molecule, an endless variety of patterns are created. There is an obvious hexagonal similarity between all snow flakes yet each is unique. This is true of reality itself, there is always some similarity in the pattern, for it all stems from the same origin, yet every component is unique.

The reason for all these mathematical patterns in the perceived reality is because pattern is an integral part of a logical Foundation that is inherent in the nature of One. Existence is One and so projects the pattern of this logical Foundation into all that there is. One can never not be since even that would be One non-existence. Since One cannot not be, it is not created but is the source of that which we perceive as creation. There is only One Nothing. The sum total of All There Is, is Nothing; creation is just the subdivision of Nothing into polarities which balance each other in a total equilibrium of Nothing. It is only because we perceive just a part of the pattern that it appears that there is something. That which, from our perspective appears to have no pattern, and so does not exist to us since we cannot recognise it, is just a part of a larger pattern. This larger pattern on an absolute scale is in complete symmetrical balance, ultimately equating the Oneness of Nothing.

Anything we can conceive can only ever be a part of the pattern. Whatever God we conceive is thus only a part of the whole and the whole is greater than the part, especially a part that is conceived to have intent which is a duality and hence a sub-division of Unity.

The meaning of meaning is the pattern of the pattern and that pattern is ultimately the inherent nature of One. The Foundation describes the undeniable conclusion that Unity must have five facets, natures or Essences and that it is the interaction of these five Essences that gives rise to all the complex pattern that we observe, that One is the Quintessential origin of all.

Re: The meaning of meaning

PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 7:15 am
by jobsaboba
Good to see yer back arturo !! :love:


Re: The meaning of meaning

PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 3:09 pm
by wntbfr33
Maybe they want to DESTROY the universe, Like in many movies :puzz: :P
Whats the opposite of consciousness?

Re: The meaning of meaning

PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:41 pm
by enegiss
welcome back arturo, hope you are well, i am going to read and digest for a day or two of which you wrote, i must say i have read some very interesting things of the logic of a belief in god and they convince me enormously as to it being a reality, would you care for a link? because i think you have a very high intellect, i think you could maybe give me some insights as to why my belief is this way, anyway, welcome back :grin: peace

Re: The meaning of meaning

PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 5:23 pm
by Arten
Interesting thread I have no idea why its so long and I have only now just seen it. :grr:

Anyway a couple of points Plato demonstrated that the concept of Nothing is a con, you cannot imagine Nothingness just try it.

The Cogitio, Cogitio ergo sum has been deconstructed so many times philosophers no longer bother with it.

In string theory there are 11 dimensions which agrees with Kabbalaha.

I am a gnostic don't believe in god or gods don't need any faith in god or gods. I know God through direct experience.

The Observer and Observed are one

The dreamer and the dream are one.

You were never borne you will never die.

Consciousness not matter is the primary stuff of the universe.
I have recently read Abbots Flatland reading that might help people here with the diagrams that have been provided
I just finished reading Russell's book From Science to God

I Am That
You Are That
And That is all there is.
Indian Guru

Re: The meaning of meaning

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:51 pm
by ArturoDekko
Thanks for your regards guys.
jobsaboba :love: :shake:
wntbfr33 - ALL possibilities exist, including one where the Universe is destroyed. I choose not to inhabit that one. Everything we imagine exists somewhere or, to put it another way, existence IS our imagination.
Consciousness is One, it is beyond duality. We can have a reduced consciousness and an expanded consciousness but, from our personal perspective, when we have no consciousness, there is no existence.
enegiss - :hug: Since all possibilities exist, all possible explanations of god exist. They are all interesting in their own way but for me, if an explanation does not begin with the nature of One then it has no true foundation for everything is built upon One and is inseparable from One.
Arten - :sun: welcome.
Interesting thread I have no idea why its so long and I have only now just seen it
From the simplicity of One, all complexities arise in infinite variety. This thread has a simple point - All is One - it is the expansion of that that takes a lot of space.
Anyway a couple of points Plato demonstrated that the concept of Nothing is a con, you cannot imagine Nothingness just try
As you will find further back in the thread, Nothing is nothing of everything and so contains everything. The Void which is nothing of nothing cannot be imagined since there is no existence as you say.
The Cogitio, Cogitio ergo sum has been deconstructed so many times philosophers no longer bother with it.
Agreed. We are more than thought and we cannot prove there is anything outside our experience other than we are having one.
In string theory there are 11 dimensions which agrees with Kabbalaha.
Different perspective require different numbers of dimensions to explain them. String theory is a projection from within the apparent 3 dimensional reality and I believe that if you search the eleven dimensions diligently, you will not find the dimension of Fun or consciousness. In my view, there are infinitely many dimensions and we are experiencing one of the most limited perspectives of that reality.
I am a gnostic don't believe in god or gods don't need any faith in god or gods. I know God through direct experience.
As above post. Our recognition of God is our recognition of the part of the pattern we are in. Each culture see gods that are within the historical context of that culture. In mystic dreams and vision, South Americans see South American gods, Chinese see Chinese gods, North American Indians see Their gods and totems, Hindu see their own gods, George bush sees himself, I see the One that contains them all.
The Observer and Observed are one
The dreamer and the dream are one.
You were never borne you will never die.
Consciousness not matter is the primary stuff of the universe.
Not sure if "Flatland" is the same as I read when younger but imagining 3 dimensions from a 2 dimensional perspective is very useful for imagining 4 dimensions from within 3.

What of my beliefs as opposed to strictly logical understandings that I can impart to others? The highest entity I KNOW is a ten dimensional collective of light beings who are spread throughout the galaxy and who speak through the six dimensional Sirian Council of Estragoth who I am beginning to channel. Since all possibilities exist, so do all angels(love them), gods, fairies, driads, nature spirits, Gaia. The Earth, the sky, the wind, the water, trees animals etc are all my friends. I believe we are eternal, infinite multidimensional beings that are indulging in a limited experience in the same way as one might study the restricted view through a microscope to inspect the detail. We make an agreement with the collective consciousness of the planet when we come here and we come with a blueprint. The closer we come to manifesting that blueprint through our lives, the happier we are. Part of the agreement is that we forget what immense and wonderful beings we truly are in the same way as the microscopist can become lost in the image and forget the rest of life they came from. Our limited pompous egos think our consciousness is all there is and fail to see the spirit that is in everything. What we perceive as reality is created by each individual as a projection of themselves. We each live in our own Universe, our own dimension. We appear to agree on the similarities of "reality" because we have that agreement at a higher level. We all have many levels and mostly experience the lower ones. Above our mind, is the witness, the one who watches our thoughts, above that is the wise and powerful Higher Consciousness that guides us as much as we will listen, above that is the Over Soul that has many Higher Consciousnesses that we may recognise, if we are in tune with them, as our reincarnations and co-creations and all the other infinitely many you's that are having similar but slightly different experiences in different dimensions and Universes, including soul mates, parallel souls, alien incarnations ... . Above the Over Souls are higher entities that contain many Over Souls ... all the way to the One that is All. We are directly linked to the Source and inseparable from it. Is that weird enough for you?
AD :saint:

Re: The meaning of meaning

PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:42 am
by wntbfr33
ALL possibilities exist, including one where the Universe is destroyed

But would that also not-exists because if its destroyed their must be on oppisite?
Man think about that their is abslutly nothing.. how awfull would that be,
When i was young i always said look into my eye and you will see the universe,
Maybe thats how it looks like zoomed-out max :grin: if their is a 'max'

So anything is possible, What do you think first came? Did it start with a small atom and grew? It is so hard to imagine but there has to be an answer,
If imagination creates realitiy, Then we created death?
Or has death always been, Does growth apply? Does the universe grows?
And still after everything and all, From killing to lieing and misbelief mistrust,
I cannot, i just cant see the point in all of it why does somebody want to have all control, Why want to be loved in way, That it is inevetble, and not out of free choice, why not rule with love instead of hate, why hide while you can show yourself and tell the truth of truths and live in peace, Go to space with peacefull means,

Like many people think there is going to happen someting, Some say 2012 etc.
Are the only options

1. All that is goes even worse, Or worser?
2. All that is will go good, or better?

I see it as a chess game, But still you can offer a draw / resign.

what is someone trys to imagine nothingness so hard and so long that it will trigger an event that nothingness overpowers existence :grin:
But still, you say life nor death exist, but only consciousnesses, but isnt the brain 'encoding' consciousnesses so when we 'die' brain shuts off, gone consciousnesses? and so they hide.. eternal life? Just some crazy thought :puzz:

One major question arises here. This is copyright-able and patent-able. Would a patent on the definition of meaning and symbolism give control over all other uses of meaning and symbolism, all other patents?

So what you'r saying is someting arise someting dissapears, like anything is possible to only limited things possible / nothing - only that symbel / pattern ?

So pattern is controlled by rhytm rhytm is controlled by cyclic change, is controlled by existance, existance is controlled by change?.. anddd.. change is controlled by Obama??? :puzz: :gasp:

We are the opposite of the universe > imperfect
So consciousnesses is around for a long time now, Maybe someone wants to get rid off it

Re: The meaning of meaning

PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:05 pm
by Arten
Thanks for the response for me it comes down to Imagination everything that is imagined exist somewhere :grin:

Re: The meaning of meaning

PostPosted: Sun Jan 24, 2010 4:09 pm
by enegiss
hi guys, ime still reading, my comp has been down for a week, AD, i find your reply on first instance very interesting, and i look forward to replying in due course, as there are one or two things i would like to put forward if i may, but ime going to do a little revision to clear what i think and so to be able to write it in ( i hope :grin: ) an intelligent way. peace

Re: The meaning of meaning

PostPosted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 2:37 pm
by enegiss
Hi AD, been having a think of the pattern thing, which I am in agreement with, years ago when I was a youth, I already felt that I knew this to be a reality so I think I understand where it is that your coming from, but what I cant seem to get a grip of, is, if the soul has no pattern other than ego (i.e. no mathematical formulae), and the ego has non of the qualities of this material life in its makeup other than what it experiences in real time and which is retained for reference, therefore, imho, it would have no pattern that is quantifiable by any standards that we know of, should they exist, as in your meaning of meaning, I believe that there is a super ego that has made my existence possible by bringing into being an ego of a lesser stature, but not made of or within the boundaries of metaphysics or physics, as we know them or realise them to ourselves, I believe that an angel, is a being, that has been created with an ego that holds no ability to choose, as it is created only with love of its creator, I believe that we, choose to disbelieve, because our ego suggest that idea to ourselves, which creator gave to us, to be able to do so, so it could be decided for and by ourselves what level of existence we will be in after the death event, which makes us ( or I) get to realise the important words, like, “eat of the tree of knowledge and we shall be as gods” really mean for me, of course we are in gods image, of course we shall be like gods, of course we shall exist within our own knowledge after this life, until we realise the truth and travel onwards, my truth being, there can only be one, and sums thereof (1)(us) everything else is a pattern, alive in its own existence of evolution, created to become a pattern from the seemingly random which in reality is a creation in its own right. But we, can never be the first (1) as that position has been taken, and yes, i believe, we are all one, each of us individual and indivisable, not of first, but by first. Inserted into an evolving reality that in itself is alive as a created entity, which will come to an end and its own truth of god and its place. What do you think? AD, am I completely wrong, do you think there is logic to this belief? I wish to attain knowledge, but I again stress, I am uneducated, so have no real ways or structures other than my mind to learn, I have no organisational experience and do not have a library or reference material and I didnt get schooling, so I relish anything I learn from others who have these tools, thank god for good people like yourself who helps others like me, as I believe it is a blessing from god to me to have you as a forwarder of the sublime. Peace always. :hug: